openmic.social is an uncensored community. You may encounter strong language, controversial opinions, and mature or NSFW material. You must be 18+ to browse. Illegal content is prohibited and removed on sight — please report it. By continuing, you accept that you may see content you personally disagree with.
You don’t need to stoop to insults.
Then the responsible journalists wouldn’t publish the story. I don’t know why you have so much disdain for this independent group.
I’d hate to hear your takes when Ed Snowden “illegally” leaked files to journalists.
I’m thinking about how your concern (which is borderline concern trolling) leaves no way to hold billionaires and their unethical companies accountable.
Like you said:
Just imagine if we applied this to the AI weirdos.
My concern isn’t the story, it’s the “hiding a tracking device in an order with an anonymous party”. That’s an invasion of privacy no matter who it’s done to. You’re presumably only okay with it because you dislike who it was done to, which is why I’m asking you to consider it without hindsight. What if it were done to someone other than Amazon? Do you still support that invasion of privacy? Why or why not?
Amazon isn’t a person, no corporation is. They should be subject to far more exposure.
They didn’t know it was Amazon when they hid a tracking device in someone’s order. They suspected, only.
What if it had been a small bookstore, or just some collector? Do you approve of those people being tracked?
Are you really not seeing this, or are you pretending to not get it?
What if journalists learned the names of innocent people in the Epstein files? Do the ends justify the means??? Oh no!
The answer to your question is “then the article wouldn’t exist”.
Your “concern” reads like concern trolling because the only way to satiate it is to shut down the free press, apparently to defend the space billionaire/pedophile billionaire class.